User talk:EibhilinRhett
Welcome Hello and welcome to - a Baldur's Gate franchise knowledge base built by the fans, built for the fans! Your contributions to the File:Dradeelshut.png page have made our community a better place, thank you and keep up the good work! Please do not hesitate to leave a message on my talk page if I can be of any help. Islandking (talk) 22:07, November 26, 2017 (UTC) No, I'm not after you … … just doing something that's called "patrolling" on wikis. ;) I only adjust your valued additions to a format that's used on other articles, that might count as established – if there is something like that on this wiki. (Many a mess, still …) Just wanted to explain. :) -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cC -- 19:59, December 7, 2017 (UTC) :Wait! "Many a mess" wasn't related to your edits! I meant wiki pages in general. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cC -- 20:00, December 7, 2017 (UTC) ---- Well, not really "incorrect as well", there's just no guideline for it. And I'm a person who likes quotes on character pages, also add them if they're missing, and prefer them placed at the top of the page – as "welcome" so to say. You find the best in guidelines this wiki has to offer on the Model Pages, linked at the top menu under "Community", if you need examples. Or do it the way you deem it best. :) -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cC -- 20:50, December 7, 2017 (UTC) ---- I think you haven't read my notes in the deletion flag: * "deleted all references" * "… subpage. As such it can't be properly switched to a disambiguation or similar" And a look at (accessible via the "My Tools" in the bottom menu) shows that there are no links left to the page, after I did five articles of them. :) But many thanks for finding my gender oversight! -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cC -- 22:43, December 7, 2017 (UTC) Hi there, EibhilinRhett Looks like you’ve made your way through the Isle of Balduran :-), it was that part I like BG1 the most. If you have any questions about editing, don’t hesitate to leave me a message, I’ll help with what I know. Cheers, Islandking♔ ♙ 10:10, December 8, 2017 (UTC) Sewers Hi, there! You're doing quite well, here! I like your articles or expansions of other ones. :) Now, that you've created Ratchild, I'd like your opinion on something, I am working on: what do you think would be the most appropriate names for the three sewer areas beneath Baldur's Gate? Baldur's Gate Sewers (east) (etc.), like I created? Or would Sewers beneath Baldur's Gate (east) be better? Perhaps East Sewers beneath Baldur's Gate? East Sewers? (This one, I think, is too vague.) Something else? (Keep in mind, that there are more sewers than those under BG.) What do you think? -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cC -- 04:42, December 11, 2017 (UTC) ---- Thanks! So you prefer the whole title in one instead of placing the directions in parentheses, as I did? But would people not rather search for "Sewers" – and then would have to decide which ones they take, such as Sewers (Temple District) or Sewers beneath Saradush? So wouldn't Sewers (Baldur's Gate East) be the better naming? -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cC -- 05:53, December 11, 2017 (UTC) ---- Yes, I had this thought, that the "(BG …)" solution would be too much of a connection to the (not solely) related district, by myself. Just needed a confirmation. For the capitalization part: if a so-called disambiguation suffix is added to an article's name, which counts for almost everything inside parentheses, then it should be not capitalized (though some false examples exist here). (See User talk:CompleCCity#Re: Disambiguations for a comment by an admin on this; however, that's a common rule, applying to lots of wikis.) So either "Baldur's Gate Sewers (east)" or "Baldur's Gate Sewers East". Thanks for your input! Next step for me would be to ask Islandking, that admin, about ideas. Or opinions. :) -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cC -- 06:46, December 11, 2017 (UTC) Interactions Hi. How do you get all that information of the party banter? Did you elaborately test all those combos? -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cC -- 12:52, December 18, 2017 (UTC) ---- Thanks for the info! Might I dare to ask if something similar applies to more of your edits? I was wondering about the order of articles you contributed to – didn't look like you were doing a walkthrough simultaneously. So simply adding info from your "notes"? ;) Please say that at least the wording is by yourself! 'cause – I like that. Much better than usual here around (and on other wikis as well). -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cC -- 13:38, December 19, 2017 (UTC) ---- : @CompleCCity : Imo, it’s equally important to compile info across the internet (provided there’s no copyright issue), especially from some forum archives which are buried so deep that no one will take notices of that until someone bring them to the light, as it is for wiki exclusive content (contributor’s original writings). Wiki is, after all, an encyclopedia for various topics, so long as new info keeps pouring in, it’s set on the right path, it’s just various contributors will have different ways of finding info, which is good in their own ways. : Islandking♔ ♙ 16:08, December 19, 2017 (UTC) :: @ Islandking: :: I didn't allege plagiarism or something – just wanted to talk with Eibhilin and mention how much I like her contributions. So I don't exactly know what's your intention here … -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cC -- 16:24, December 19, 2017 (UTC) ---- I'm happy to read all this! :) Well, as a non-native speaker of the English language (guess, you are one, though?) and with reading experience only from wikis, boards and games (nope, never read an English piece of literature since school days), I can't really tell if your writing style is "casual" or something. What I can tell is that I like reading your contributions. They differ – as already mentioned – from lots of other texts on the wiki, and one gets the impression of a person who actually knows what they're writing instead of someone who's only trying to find the right words … or, even worse, doesn't care about them at all. (I think, I pretty much liked some link to your fanfic – now that I know you're indeed writing stuff. :) For the general wiki style and your worries about scholarlylessness: There are many BGI area articles (possibly even ones for BGII, but I haven't found them, yet) that are written with some humor, or not exactly "encyclopedic" (scholarly ;), when listing NPCs or quests. Unfortunately I haven't an example in mind right now, but perhaps you've found some by your own and know what I'm talking about. I've tried to adopt that style on some of my edits, e.g. when rewriting the creatures' section of the lighthouse. Well, okay, not much of humor there, but mayhaps you get a guess of what I mean … (if not – ask! Please …) That's what I thought would be this wiki's style, when arriving here – not a pure encyclopedia, but something that also is fun to read. Something that not exactly follows those stiff general MOS rules, many other wikis have. Something that honors the games' style of writing and humor. I try to fit into this when, for example, placing that exact quote there on the top of Garan's article, while simultaneously trying to add some mystical or dark tone to the Ice Island with Dezkiel's text on the start. Judging by your relationship sections, you're thinking similar. (Similar''ly''?) I'm stuck on the Isle of Balduran … Just got some task from Kaishas and next is to explore the village, when I put the game to rest for some days. What I am doing in such a case is even less scholarly than your wiki-contributing approach – I don't take a look into the insights or visit the Category:Maintenance (if it existed), I regularly have open the and "patrol" them, as you noticed. ;) (Though without any patrol-related user rights.) And I do use Near Infinity for exact information (and an easier way to get dialogue or other quotes), though I can't really rely on my own "LOT of saves", because I'm playing a modded game. (For that NI research I have copies of the unmodded game directories.) Which brings back some question into my mind, regarding Silence: do you have mods installed? Yup, I noticed your blog, just don't have reacted, yet – which I probably do next. :) If you at any point have any question or concern regarding my edits of yours, please feel free to revert them or contact me about! Nice talking to you. Hope, there'll be an answer … -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cC -- 10:51, December 20, 2017 (UTC) About page organization Re: Companion Page Organization Thanks for consulting me. (Thanks for the answer. Thanks for the link (not visited, yet). Thanks for the compliment(?) about my English – though it's no confirmation or negation of my guess ;) Some thoughts about your topic: * A general "Personality" section, similar to "Background" or "Biography" on other wikis, near the top of the article (usually as first one after the intro) has a rather encyclopedic style, while placing it after the single games' involvement sections near the bottom of the article is more close to a walkthrough and gamer oriented style. ** This wiki often seems to be one of the latter category, though the game itself and its characters definitely deserve the former – not because I simply appreciate Baldur's Gate, but because of how it's written and the companions are elaborated, especially through their relationships and banter. * A general "Personality" section, however, has the disadvantage of delivering spoilers if the character appears in more than one installation. That's no concern if this section appears at the bottom of the page, after all other content (except for those who jump there directly via the TOC and skip the other stuff) … But would a new player – or somebody who's forgotten most of the story since their last play, or someone familiar with BGI only – like to read that e.g. Imoen "struggles with her newly-discovered Bhaalspawn heritage" in Shadows of Amn, when they just start for the first time their big walk through the entire trilogy and only wanted to look for some background about that annoying little girl, they have to decide whether or not to take with them after Gorion's death? (A lot of people would say about a game this old that you can't spoil anything anymore, but I believe that's not right – never spoil where it's not necessary or unavoidable!) * I totally agree that the section would be better placed near the introduction of the character – because it is part of somebody's introduction. * Perhaps the best would be to integrate it into the specific games' subsections for characters with more than one appearance. (Though you still had to reword that Imoen sentence for no spoiler if this section's closer to the top.) * Now back to where exactly place it in the order: a "Personality" section would be strongly connected to "Background/Backstory" and "In-game biography", but also to "Relationships" and even "Quotes/Dialogue". "Recruitment" and "Quests", however, are of no less importance to the player. ** Personally I'd say we could omit the "In-game biography" if its content is implemented into the article, but that would be against this wiki's current rules. ** I have to (re-)construct an example article, to see what I would like most (and I stay with Imoen, because she's the model companion) … ---- Imoen Keep as is – with some rewording and -formatting, perhaps. Baldur's Gate Character First two paragraphs from personality section – with some rewording, perhaps. Recruitment Keep as is – with some rewording, perhaps. Quests If there are any. Gameplay Keep as is – with some rewording and -formatting, perhaps. Relationships Mostly a listing, somehow related to Gameplay. Quotes Keep as is. Siege of Dragonspear Not yours. Shadows of Amn Character Summary of same section from part I (for those who don't play BGI), with BGII related changes and additions. Recruitment Keep as is – with some rewording, perhaps. Quests If there are any. Gameplay Keep as is – with some rewording and -formatting, perhaps. Relationships Mostly a listing, somehow related to Gameplay. Quotes Keep as is. ---- * Personal thoughts about this: ** What about naming it "Character"? ** There's even a split into SoA and ToB possible – for the BGII romance results. ** We could omit the heading "In-game biography", because as a quote it stands out by itself and serves as the introduction to that subsection – intros don't use headings. (Place "In-game biography" as source into the quote: ) ** I have disconnected "Personality" and "Relationships", though for someone like me it's important to know earlier with which companions someone might get problems. (And – nothing against your sections! – a short overview of who works well and who will clash might be helpful as well.) So it's probably a good idea to mention conflicts and friendships briefly within the "Personality". * Some advice: if you really gonna start this, you should keep consistency and try to apply these changes to all companions in a reasonable frame of time. * And you really should get Islandking's agreement – he will have an opinion and administrative point of view on this. ;) ** Consider to discuss this more openly in the forum, though you might there get only Islandking and me as well. ** If you need links to this (can't exactly judge your wiki coding knowledge ;): *** … *** … * But also feel free to go deeper into discussion with me, first. P.S. You now didn't answer my question whether your game is modded or not for a second time. Don't you know? ;) -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cC -- 14:25, December 21, 2017 (UTC) Islandking's thoughts @CompleCCity It may prove hard for this dramatic change considering how this site have set a number of “hidden” content organization rules over the past years, and when I was regrouping the content in companion’s pages, I tried to abide the existing rules and keep the overall consistency of them in mind, as you can see, most item pages have the Location/Acquisition header, which resembles Recruitment on top, and the In-game description indeed uses another header, which is “In-game biography” responsibly. Beregost, one of the earliest pages to be created, has Side quests as a header which is second to top, of a high priority, which is also good for companion articles because once someone joins the party, the related quests begin. So this is generally how companion pages are grouped, gamer-oriented, the Relationships header was originally used to hold conflicts and pairs most players will have to consider when they form their party, the conflict/pair info is on the Infoboxes as well for quick references, now that @EibhilinRhett expended this section, it still can still be quick references by adding '''bold '''texts on the game-impact conflict/pair because some readers trend to ignore the infoboxes... then comes the Gameplay section when the party is settled down and we should look for some insights on the strength & weakness of this companion. The only inconsistency of the companion pages now is the reversal of In-game biography and Gameplay headers, will find a way to change that. @EibhilinRhett have a point that Personality can be splitted into games, and it can come to anywhere between after the Gameplay (end of gamer-oriented), also considering many companion pages are actually lacking the Personality section, this discussion is still a bit earlier and definitely not on top because of that. Islandking♔ ♙ 15:37, December 21, 2017 (UTC) Re: Eibhilin's answer You can put Personality below In-game biography and ahead of Quotes & Dialogues. Keep in mind that for players who’re not familiar with this game, conflicts/pair info is a more important factor for party composition, new players may end up with a “content” party only results in one member tries to kill another after some time’s passed & exp gained, which is not nice. So I’d also advise you to BOLD the game-impact conflicts/pair info or the companions name (eg, BOLD '''Yeslick Orothair '''in Kagain's page) when you expand the Relationships section. Islandking♔ ♙ 05:19, December 22, 2017 (UTC) ---- I've put this to the forum, for a not-distributed-on-several-pages discussion – continue here, please: Companion page and general wiki layout/styling -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cC -- 06:59, December 22, 2017 (UTC) Merry Christmas EibhilinRhett ! Hi there, besides Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, may I also wish you Happy Reading :-) BGW, like all wikis, need all kinds of info to be great! As the new year approaches, you will not see me active as the other time of the year, but do feel free to leave me messages, I’ll sure look at them. Islandking♔ ♙ 14:48, December 22, 2017 (UTC) Re: re: Conflicts Hello, "friends" and "enemies" can also be the relations outside the companions, can be organizations too, if you have info on these fields, add them as well. All the fields under “Relationships” headings in companion Infobox are there to quickly distinguish different kinds of relations. Islandking♔ ♙ 16:02, December 22, 2017 (UTC)